inner templates?

[dennis luehring]

Daniel Keep schrieb:
> 
> dennis luehring wrote:
>> template fe(double p=1e-14)
>> {
>>   template fe_help(double p, double s=1, double f=1, int n=1)
>>   {
>>     if( s > p )
>>       const fe_help = fe_help!(p, s/n,f+s/n,n+1);
>>     else
>>       const fe_help = f;
>>   }
>>   return fe_help!(p);
>> }
>>
>> proposal: we've got inner functions, inner classes - what speaks against
>> inner templates? (except that the d compiler don't know the last one)
> 
> We already do.  Just change that second-last line to:
> 
>   const fe = fe_help!(p);
> 
> The problem is that then you have to use it like so:
> 
>   fe!().fe;
> 
> Since having more than one member in a template breaks the implicit
> property trick.  Of course, you can get around that by doing this:
> 
> private template fe_help(double p, double s=1, double f=1, int n=1)
> {
>     if( s > p )
>         const fe_help = fe_help!(p, s/n,f+s/n,n+1);
>     else
>         const fe_help = f;
> }
> 
> template fe(double p=1e-14)
> {
>     const fe = fe_help!(p);
> }
> 
> The "private" will hide the fe_help template from outsiders.  If you
> don't care about that middle blank line, it's even the same number of
> lines of code!

> See, what you should be asking for is that private members of a template
> don't break the implicit property trick thing (no idea what it's
> "officially" called).

did you think an inner template (or a changed implicit property thing) 
would made D more clean?

> But that said, it's a pretty minor problem, and easy to work around.

your right - but it should be no need for such workaround - maybe in 
later D versions

thx

> 
> 	-- Daniel
>